Coincidentally, the topic of social/human-technology interaction is in the news quite a bit today.  I’m pleased that the topic of the human factors implications of the social interaction with technology is getting more focus.

First, Dr. Wendy Rogers of Georgia Tech gets interviewed in the New York Times about her work on older adults and in-home helper robots:

Dr. Rogers has been experimenting with a large robot called the PR2, made by Willow Garage, a robotics company in Palo Alto, Calif., which can fetch and administer medicine, a seemingly simple act that demands a great deal of trust between man and machine.

“We are social beings, and we do develop social types of relationships with lots of things,” she said. “Think about the GPS in your car, you talk to it and it talks to you.” Dr. Rogers noted that people developed connections with their Roomba, the vacuum robot, by giving the machines names and buying costumes for them. “This isn’t a bad thing, it’s just what we do,” she said.

In a more ambitious use of technology, NPR is reporting that researchers are using computer-generated avatars as interviewers to detect soldiers who are susceptible to suicide. Simultaneously, facial movement patterns of the interviewee are recorded:

“For each indicator,” Morency explains, “we will display three things.” First, the report will show the physical behavior of the person Ellie just interviewed, tallying how many times he or she smiled, for instance, and for how long. Then the report will show how much depressed people typically smile, and finally how much healthy people typically smile. Essentially it’s a visualization of the person’s behavior compared to a population of depressed and non-depressed people.

While this sounds like an interesting application, I have to agree with with one of its critics that:

“It strikes me as unlikely that face or voice will provide that information with such certainty,” he says.

At worst, it will flood the real therapist with a “big data”-type situation where there may be “signal” but way too much noise (see this article).

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• HFES Conference in San Antonio, Part 3 – Health/Internet…and ROBOTS!
• Who’s responsible when the robot (or automation) is wrong?
• Resources: Human Factors Design Considerations in Home Health Technology
• HFES Conference Part 6: Health & Human Factors

The guidelines include recommendations to limit the time a driver must take his eyes off the road to perform any task to two seconds at a time and twelve seconds total.

…

The recommendations outlined in the guidelines are consistent with the findings of a new NHTSA naturalistic driving study, The Impact of Hand-Held and Hands-Free Cell Phone Use on Driving Performance and Safety Critical Event Risk. The study showed that visual-manual tasks associated with hand-held phones and other portable devices increased the risk of getting into a crash by three times. [emphasis added]

But a new study (I have not read the paper yet) seems to show that even when you take away the “manual” aspect through voice input, the danger is not mitigated:

The study by the Texas Transportation Institute at Texas A&M University was the first to compare voice-to-text and traditional texting on a handheld device in an actual driving environment.

“In each case, drivers took about twice as long to react as they did when they weren’t texting,” Christine Yager, who headed the study, told Reuters. “Eye contact to the roadway also decreased, no matter which texting method was used.”

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Driving and Talking in California
• Driven to Distraction
• Politics and Research: Driver Distraction
• Two HF Driving News Articles

• The blog Touch Usability finds a great video of Bill Buxton discussing Designing for Ubiquitous Computing
• Smashing Magazine illustrates a simple and effective UX tool (the rainbow spreadsheet) to visualize user behavior during testing
• The Atlantic Magazine wonders how kids will be messed up by using touch screens so early!  Experts weigh in…
• Usability guru Jakob Nielsen does not like how web searching is done today.  How would he change it?
• Finally, knobfeel, an audio equipment review site that focuses on the feel of the knobs on the equipment…that is all.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• HF/Design/Usability Potpourri from around the Web
• HF Potpourri
• Dashboards meet the 21st century
• Usability Potpourri

I had heard that the Tesla Model S (the luxury electric car) had a giant touch screen as one of the main interfaces for secondary car functions and always wondered what that might be like from a human factors/usability perspective. Physical knobs and switches, unlike interface widgets, give a tactile sensation and do not change location on the dashboard.

This post is an interesting examination of the unique dashboard:

Think about a car’s dashboard for a second. It’s populated with analog controls: dials, knobs, and levers, all of which control some car subsystem such as temperature, audio, or navigation. These analog dials, while old, have two features: tactility and physical analogy. Respectively, this means you can feel for a control, and you have an intuition for how the control’s mechanical action affects your car (eg: counterclockwise on AC increases temperature). These small functions provide a very, very important feature: they allow the driver to keep his or her eyes on the road.

Except for a the privileged few that have extraordinary kinesthetic sense of where our hands are, the Model S’s control scheme is an accident waiting to happen. Hell, most of us can barely type with two hands on an iPhone. Now a Model S driver has to manage all car subsystems on a touchscreen with one hand while driving.

The solution, however, is may not be heads-up displays or augmented reality, as the author suggests (citing the HUD in the BMW).

While those displays allow the eye to remain on the road it’s always in the way–a persistent distraction. Also, paying attention to the HUD means your attention will not be on the road–and what doesn’t get paid attention to doesn’t exist:

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Dashboards meet the 21st century
• Automakers: Don’t skimp on the interface!
• Cataloging the Rights Along with the Wrongs: Angry Birds
• Usability Follies in the News

No fear! You can still get email subscriptions to our blog by entering your email in the right-hand column textfield. If you use a feedreader, you may also want to update your link to us (also on the right side). The redirection should be automatic but you never know with automation!

The new feed link is: http://humanfactorsblog.org/feed/

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• You can now follow us on Twitter
• The Elusive Moodle!
• Usability Potpourri
• HF Graduate Programs: Clemson University

My history of use of the iPad started with great skepticism, moved into curious and active experimentation, and has settled into routine usage. Now, it’s an integrated part of my work and play. I’ve even done what was once unthinkable: nearly wrote a entire manuscript on the iPad without a hardware keyboard! (read on).

With great skepticism I got the original iPad a few months after it was released in 2010. While I could see the theoretical benefits of such a lightweight device, there was not yet much software that was specialized to do any work. In terms of usage, there were probably days that I did not use the iPad. It was primarily relegated to recreational web surfing or curious novelty.

After the release of the iPad 2, however, my usage increased dramatically. The reduction in weight and size, as well as the release of high quality productivity software meant that I not only carried it along with my then-laptop (Fujitsu P1620 ultraportable tablet), I could start to envision how I might start replacing my laptop. Usage was probably split 20 (iPad)/80 (laptop) in terms of mobile computing. It also helped that it was at this time that I switched my desktop computer and laptop to Mac. This made it much more seamless to use Keynote and Pages as replacements for Powerpoint and Word. I’ve kicked Powerpoint but I can’t yet kick Word to the curb.

The iPad 3 again increased usage mainly because of the high resolution display and dramatic speed increase made everything better, especially reading PDFs.

Now, I have an iPad mini and all the software that I’ve mentioned in previous posts are still usable but the form factor has now truly made it even more my primary mobile device of choice over the laptop. The effects of an always-on, super-ultra lightweight device seems to encourage frequent use in places where even a laptop is clunky (e.g., in bed, passenger in a car). I’m currently working on a manuscript and I would estimate that I’ve written more than 50% of it on the iPad mini (using the software keyboard and Pages). Probably another 10% on the iPhone (reading what I wrote, light editing) and the rest on the desktop or laptop computer.

Keynote is an especially capable presentation app. I’ve worked on full presentations created on the iPad (but presented on a laptop). They are whisked silently through the cloud and are on my laptop/desktop waiting for me.

But there are other things that are making the iPad work especially well for me. One feature that isn’t discussed a great deal in reviews is iCloud. iCloud, in contrast to Dropbox, invisibly keeps my Keynote (class lectures, professional presentations) and Pages (manuscripts) in sync on all my devices (desktop, laptop, iPad mini, and iPhone). I still use Dropbox but iCloud is simpler model with less thinking about spatial file organization (the file is just in the app). I still use Dropbox but treat it like an archive; a folder with many levels of folders. While I treat iCloud as an active area for current work, a work space. iCloud = short term memory, dropbox = long term memory. This setup works quite well for me.

Uses will be different for different people but for me (someone who values portability above all else and is a tinkerer) the Mini is a winner (it replaced my iPad 3). I also did not set unrealistic expectations of the device which may be why I’m so surprised how much of my daily computing can be addressed with such a relatively low-powered device. The size/weight of the Mini simply overwhelms any other benefit of the larger iPads. When I travel, I am now more likely to be carrying just the iPad (with no laptop unless I know i’ll need to program or do statistical analysis). In the end, it allows me to do a small amount of things in more places than at my desk.

To conclude, my most frequently used apps lately are:

• Keynote (lecture and presentation creation & editing)
• Papers (reading PDFs, literature searching)
• Pages (manuscript creation and editing)
• Email (built-in client)
• LogMeIn Ignition (for connecting to my desktop computer remotely)

Keynote and Papers are truly exceptional apps that have nearly the full functionality of their desktop counterparts without replicating the same interaction style (i.e., they are optimized for tablets). I actually prefer doing lit searches in the iOS version of papers than using the desktop version!

This list is short because everything else is for fun!

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Revisiting an academic’s use of the iPad
• Update on an Academic’s Use of the iPad
• iPad is everything the Kindle isn’t (for my use cases)
• Electronic Books–A Human Factors perspective

By all accounts a modest man despite his variegated accomplishments (he had a doctorate in mathematical psychology, was trained in electrical engineering and had been a professional violinist), Mr. Karlin, who died on Jan. 28, at 94, was virtually unknown to the general public.

He is still relatively unknown to HF only because he rarely published his results; instead, he worked to solve problems in industry using the scientific method that all psychologists use.

“He was the one who introduced the notion that behavioral sciences could answer some questions about telephone design,” Ed Israelski, an engineer who worked under Mr. Karlin at Bell Labs in the 1970s, said in a telephone interview on Wednesday.

The NYT recently posted an obit detailing his contributions including such fundamental ones such as the telephone numeric layout (different from calculator layout):

Putting “1-2-3” on the pad’s top row instead of the bottom (the configuration used, then as now, on adding machines and calculators) was also born of Mr. Karlin’s group: they found it made for more accurate dialing.

The piece is very well written and I’m a little surprised that the author actually seems to understand HF and how it’s unique from other things (emphasis added):

It is not so much that Mr. Karlin trained midcentury Americans how to use the telephone. It is, rather, that by studying the psychological capabilities and limitations of ordinary people, he trained the telephone, then a rapidly proliferating but still fairly novel technology, to assume optimal form for use by midcentury Americans.

(NYT: great article but you hyphenated human factors in the 10th paragraph)

Go read it!

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Designing Displays for Older Adults: Chapter 1 (excerpt)
• Facebook and Privacy: A Guest Post by Kelly Caine
• Human Factors and Healthcare: The older patient & nurse
• Electronic Books–A Human Factors perspective

“I plan to offer a class on Human Factor’s Psychology in my school. I’ve looked around to internet for resources…there really isn’t much out there….”

How did you start teaching human factors?  If you had to teach a semester-long course, what would be your resource?  Please chime in!

My undergraduate course is a fusion of material from the required text (Introduction to Human Factors), some chapters from the Design of Everyday Things (which I don’t require to read but may take inspiration from), and Casey’s classic Set Phasers on Stun.  And plenty of examples of human factors from the web to make the material more timely.

A major component is the group project where students pick a system and conduct a human factors evaluation as an end-of-the-semester presentation.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• How does one get into Human Factors?
• The Human Factors “elevator speech”
• HF Graduate Programs: Clemson University
• Kitchen Taskonomy Part 1: A Guest Post by Kim Wolfinbarger

The tone is very general and may give lay people a good sense of the breadth of human factors.  Plus, you can hear how we sound!

First, Anne was just interviewed for the radio show “Radio In Vivo“.

Download audio file (RIV01302013.mp3)

Late last year, I was interviewed about human factors and my research on the local public radio program Your Day:

Download audio file (YD121017.mp3)

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• HF Graduate Programs: Clemson University
• Careers in Human Factors & Aging
• Can you hear me now? Why yes, I can!
• Unusually quiet morning radio show

In todays HF potpourri we have three very interesting and loosely related stories:

• There seems to be a bit of a resurgence in the study of anthropomorphism in HF/computer science primarily because…ROBOTS.  It’s a topic I’ve written about [PDF] in the context of human-automation interaction.  The topic has reached mainstream awareness because NPR just released a story on the topic. 
• The BBC looks at the rise of websites that seem to talk to us in a very informal, casual way.  Clearly, the effect on the user is not what was intended:

The difference is the use of my name. I also have a problem with people excessively using my name. I feel it gives them some power over me and overuse implies disingenuousness. Like when you ring a call centre where they seem obsessed with saying your name.

• Finally, a link to our sister-HF blog (by Arathi Sethumadhavan) examining how priming can influence safety.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Calibrating User’s Perception of Automation
• Usability Potpourri
• HFES Conference in San Antonio, Part 3 – Health/Internet…and ROBOTS!
• With automated tagging, Web links can surprise

I just came across a great iOS app that lets you add some real interactivity to your paper prototypes:  POP Prototyping on Paper.  You simply sketch out your screen, take a picture using your iPhone camera, and then add interactivity.  It’s a brilliantly simple idea.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• That’s what I call paper prototyping!
• Crowdsourced Usability II: Mozilla Test Pilot
• Mac-based usability testing software: Silverback
• Web-based tool to measure task workload

You upload your favorite MP3 (or select among recent uploads) and the site will analyze and parse the beats.  When you hit play it will smoothly jump to another part of the song that sounds similar so there is no end.  That alone is cool, but the visualization of the process of playing and more importantly jumping to another section is surprisingly effective.  When a possible beat intersection is reached, an arc spans the circle and (randomly) jumps or stays.

The effect works best for some songs and not others.  You can get a nice at-a-glance view of the global organization of the song (highly locally repetitive like Daft Punk) or more globally repetitive (like a typical highly structured pop song):

It is probably by design that these diagrams look just like connectomes that map the neural pathways in the brain:

More on the circular diagrams of connectomes and the software used to make them (Circos).

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Data visualization tools
• Designing Displays for Older Adults: Chapter 3 Hearing (excerpt)
• Revisiting an academic’s use of the iPad
• The Zero-Fatality Car

• Touchscreen voting machine insists on voting for Romney.  This is either just really bad touchscreen calibration or a conspiracy…
• The navigation system made me do it.  Yet another story of too much trust in automation leading to complacency.
• Prototyping a digital experience using analog tools.  Clever use of lo-fi tools to rapidly simulate a high-tech system…I wonder what the mysterious system is…
• Did you ever wonder why dialog boxes say “Ok”?  Because you’re not a dolt.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Trust in Automation
• Distracted Learning
• A Timely Article on Voting Machines
• HF/Usability Hodgepodge

Some notable examples of animation are the infamous Apple’s page bounce-back, the page-curl in e-book apps or the bouncing icons on a Mac (or expanding/minimizing windows on Mac/PC).  Difficulty in quantifying objective benefits may lead some to dismiss animations as superfluous and unneccessarily ornate.  I wholeheartedly disagree.  Animations provide a fluidity that makes interfaces feel responsive even delightful.

The article provides a lot of reasons for the benefits and most appropriate use of animation. It’s typical Smashing Magazine (i.e., LOOONG) so save it to read later!

(post image from the article)

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Design & HF Potpourri
• Electronic Books–A Human Factors perspective
• Designing Displays for Older Adults: Chapter 1 (excerpt)
• Facebook and Privacy: A Guest Post by Kelly Caine

“Most children here have never seen a computer mouse,” said Hannah Tenpas, 24, a kindergarten teacher at San Antonio.

…

“The popularity of iPads and other tablets is changing how society interacts with information,” said Aniket Kittur, an assistant professor at the Human-Computer Interaction Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. “. . . Direct manipulation with our fingers, rather than mediated through a keyboard/mouse, is intuitive and easy for children to grasp.”

I realize the media needs a strong narrative to make an interesting story but the mouse is nowhere near dead.  The story is more complicated and completely depends on the task.  There are certain applications where the precise pointing afforded by mice are just too cumbersome with touch screens.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):

• Bad Design: Mouse mode and feedback
• 3D is better than 2D, right?
• Revisiting an academic’s use of the iPad
• Blogging APA Division 21: Maximizing Stimulus-Response Compatibility